Submitted by Anonymous Patron (not verified) on September 11, 2008 - 10:25am
<a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-techblog11-2008sep11,0,1721135.story?track=rss">What's the newest duty for flight attendants</a>? Making sure passengers aren't looking at porn. While JetBlue filters their Wi-Fi connection, American Airlines leaves monitoring up to the in-flight staff. Flight attendants aren't happy about this though:
Submitted by Blake on September 8, 2008 - 9:27am
D'Oh!: The 267 new replacement computers were also meant to solve a seedier problem - that of some people using its old PCs to access internet child porn.
So when the computers finally arrived, expectations were high - but there was one snag. To begin with users couldn't even access a range of innocuous websites - including the council's own - because of its highly sensitive internet filter, which is being rolled out at the same time.
Submitted by Bibliofuture on August 4, 2008 - 4:02pm
For those of you spending your workdays posting videos of the cat to YouTube or trading messages with friends on Facebook, you’d better start cultivating another pastime.
Web filtering software is moving to the cloud — that all-knowing, pervasive, sometimes unreliable cluster of computers in the digital ether — and it’s going to watch your every move online and tattle to your boss.
Zscaler, a Santa Clara start-up created by serial security entrepreneur Jay Chaudhry, is publicly unveiling itself Monday. Over the last decade, Mr. Chaudhry has founded such companies as AirDefense (sold to Motorola), CipherTrust (sold to Secure Computing), SecureIt (sold to VeriSign) and CoreHarbor (sold to USinterworking.) That makes him kind of like the Brett Favre of security entrepreneurs –- he keeps coming back.
Zscaler’s idea is to relieve companies of the tiresome and costly burden of managing Web filtering and security on their own servers. Instead, the cloud-based service, which is rented to companies by the month, acts like a Web proxy, intercepting all incoming and outbound HTTP traffic from employees and scrubbing it for malware and online activity that violates company policy.
Full story in the NYT
Submitted by Blake on July 22, 2008 - 10:28am
Tina Gasperson reviews Glubble, a free proprietary Firefox add-on from Glaxstar that limits the activity your child can perform online by blocking access to Web sites and filtering Google search results. For parents, a tool like Glubble can seem like the perfect answer to the problem of protecting kids from the unsavory elements of the Internet. But as she discovered through her use of Glubble, the questions surrounding the idea of Internet filtering don't come with easy answers.
Submitted by Blake on June 18, 2008 - 2:16pm
The Safelibraries Guy gleefully sent over a more colorful headline for This News from Ohio, where Lakewood Public Library Director Kenneth Warren wants you to know there's nothing private about the 60 public access computers at the main branch. Every 15 minutes, a staff member takes a stroll around the center to make sure library patrons are not looking at pornography, engaging in illegal gambling or visiting other questionable Web sites.
Now the library, which recently opened a new technology center, might expand its monitoring policy by using free software, called virtual network computing, that allows librarians to remotely monitor what a patron is viewing on a computer screen.
Submitted by Blake on June 5, 2008 - 9:32am
This Editorial in The Oakland Press says there's sound, logical reason for the ordinance in Royal Oak, MI, is wandering into some new territory. It could be one of the first cities in Michigan to pass an ordinance forcing the library board to install filters, according to the Michigan Municipal League. Other libraries leave only one terminal unfiltered as a matter of policy.
This editorial wouldn't normally be very interesting, but I'm behind a filter (not sure which) that does some sort of keyword filtering (not sure how) that automatically stops loading pages with bad words. It cuts this editorial off midsentence somewhere near the middle (end?) of the page. That "sound, logical reason" The Oakland Press says will save our children won't allow me to read this editorial. Should I assume this editorial has some kind of "obscene material" they say is blocked by those filters?
Submitted by Blake on April 3, 2008 - 11:10am
Once upon a time, librarians risked controversy only when they decided to slip books like "The Catcher in the Rye" onto the shelf.
The recent flap over alleged child pornography at the Lindsay branch of the Tulare County Library illustrates how dramatically the challenges for public libraries have changed, experts say.
Submitted by Blake on March 11, 2008 - 1:03pm
The Atlanta Journal Constitution Reports Gwinnett County library workers will be able to capture browsing histories from library computers and call police on suspected child pornography viewers under an Internet safety policy approved Monday. The responses include counseling users on appropriate Internet usage for less serious situations, ordering users to stop viewing obscene materials, or calling police and capturing the computer's browsing history as possible evidence in the case of child pornography.
"A lot of the pornographers, child predators and now the gangs are going to the library because they know they won't be tracked,"
Submitted by Blake on February 29, 2008 - 1:51pm
A Post Over @ Slashdot points the way to a Story on a new law in Utah. Internet service providers could earn a state-approved "G-rating" for filtering content and insuring that users could not access pornography under provisions in a bill heard by a House committee on Monday.
HB407, sponsored by Rep. Michael Morley, R-Spanish Fork, would require the Utah Division of Consumer Protection to create a designation for providers who prevent access to "prohibited" material. After attaining the "seal of approval," providers would be subject for fines up to $10,000 for violating requirements.
Submitted by Blake on February 13, 2008 - 6:39am
The Dallas News Reports A committee of Dallas City Council members unanimously recommended Tuesday that city libraries install Internet monitoring software on its publicly accessible computers – but not more restrictive filters that actively block Web content, such as pornography.
Submitted by Anonymous Patron (not verified) on February 8, 2008 - 7:21am
<a href="http://filteringfacts.org/2008/02/07/bradburn-both-sides-motion-for-summary-judgment/ ">Big developments in the</a> ongoing library filtering case Bradburn v. North Central Library. On Monday, both the library and the ACLU motioned for summary judgments. The motions are on my Bradburn page here. The ACLU and the library’s motion, along with statements of fact and memorandums in support can all be found here. There are a bunch of declarations to work through that I’ll post later. The most interesting of which is Dr.
Submitted by Blake on February 7, 2008 - 10:02am
San Jose City Councilman Pete Constant is concerned with children viewing "second-hand porn" while visiting San Jose's public libraries, which includes the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Library.
"Children can get porn anywhere. If they don't see it at the library, kids will see it in other places," said Sarah Jasso, a psychology major.
Submitted by Anonymous Patron (not verified) on January 30, 2008 - 8:08pm
Despite a groundswell of local controversy, it doesn't appear strong-arm measures like impenetrable filters or limited Internet access are in the Gwinnett County Public Library's future. Instead, library leaders plan to ask thousands of Gwinnettians for suggestions on moving forward.
Submitted by Blake on January 26, 2008 - 8:26pm
San Jose City Councilman Pete Constant accused the city's head librarian Wednesday of foot-dragging and shoddy research on his proposal to filter pornography out of library computers. Constant told Library Director Jane Light he was "disappointed" in her progress report to a council committee on his October proposal for the city to reconsider Internet filtering on library computers. A final report is due in March.
"I don't honestly feel we're going down a path to finding solutions," Constant said. "I feel we're going down a path to finding reasons not to do this."
Submitted by Anonymous Patron (not verified) on January 18, 2008 - 9:27am
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hugh-mcguire/porn-knows-what-its-for-_b_81522.html">A board member of a Canadian library argues</a> that the porn industry has figured out what its customers really want and how to provide it in the Internet age. Other content providers -- such as newspapers and libraries -- need to do the same.
Submitted by effinglibrarian on December 20, 2007 - 9:46pm
People hate librarians enough to take it all the way to the Supreme Court.
In the U.S. vs. the ALA, the attorney for the respondents, Paul M. Smith makes a case that library patrons can't be required to suffer the stigma of asking a librarian to unblock a "porn" filter. Essentially, that asking a librarian for this help is so traumatic that it should be declared unconstitutional. So that ultimately, the entire filtering issue comes down to the "stigma" of asking the librarian for help.
Submitted by Hedgie on December 14, 2007 - 2:53am
Popular knitting blogger CrazyAuntPurl <a href="http://www.crazyauntpurl.com/archives/2007/12/another_moment.php">describes a scene</a> where she sees obviously inappropriate pictures on a library computer. When she takes offense and talks to the staff person about it-- the sympathetic person notes that many staff members have also complained, apparently with no effect.
Notably--her rant is focused more on people's lack of decency these days and she's a pretty brash blogger, so it takes a lot to offend her.
Submitted by Great Western Dragon on November 19, 2007 - 7:03am
In news that surprises no one reading this site, Gwinnett County Public Library patrons discovered that the library's public internet filtering doesn't always work.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has the full story, but what got me was this line:
"At a public library in Norcross last week, it took less than 15 seconds to find pornographic photographs on a computer terminal."
Really? 15 seconds? That seems to be a long time to launch a browser, bring up Google Image Search, and search for "boobs."
Submitted by michelle c. on November 1, 2007 - 8:34pm
Popular blog Boing Boing points to one library's interesting method for dealing with library filtering, utilizing large signs designating "filtered" and "unfiltered" internet access. Says the submitter of the photo, "The 'unfiltered' side faces the reference desk so the librarians can monitor usage but they say it has reduced abuse and given adults uncensored access to the internet." Pic and entry here. An interesting comment debate follows, discussing whether the signage constitutes a privacy invasion.
Submitted by Blake on October 25, 2007 - 8:40am
The San Jose Mercury News Says Filtering was a bad idea a decade ago, and still is. Responding to a minor nuisance at the downtown library by dampening the rights of inquiry and speech of all patrons at every city library is an unacceptable trade-off.